ELECTION 2008 | The Pub | The Field Mess | The Staff College | Bookmark WAB



Go Back   World Affairs Board > International Strategic Affairs > International Defense Topics
Register FAQ WAB RSS Feed Forum GuidelinesMembers List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board!

The World Affairs Board is one of the premier forums for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include foreign & defense policy, international security, military developments, weapons proliferation, terrorism, international strategic affairs, and politics. Our membership includes many from military, defense industry, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-30-2007, 10:34 AM   #151 (permalink)
lazybastard
Regular
 
Join Date: 04-27-07
Location: Hicksville PA
Posts: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
30 days includes everything
Let me see if I'm getting this right. So only a fraction of those 2000 sorties per day were conducted with the aim of grounding the Iraqi Air Force? The rest were against ground troops, supply lines, SEAD, etc?

What to make of this?
CHINA HAS DEPLOYED 980 MISSILES AGAINST TAIWAN

Trying to find a copy of what Bernard Cole actually said.

Last edited by lazybastard : 04-30-2007 at 11:35 AM.
lazybastard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2007, 12:09 PM   #152 (permalink)
Officer of Engineers
Military Professional
Moderator
Scotch taster
 
Join Date: 08-06-03
Posts: 17,064
Country:
You don't kill an airbase by filling its runways with craters. You kill an airbase by killing the engineers who are filling those craters and the Allies did just that. They went back to kill those engineers a minimum of four times before the ground war began.
__________________
Chimo
Officer of Engineers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2007, 16:56 PM   #153 (permalink)
gunnut
Senior Contributor
 
gunnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01-27-06
Location: DPRK, Democratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
Posts: 10,209
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by lazybastard View Post
Are those sorties all airfield cratering or did you count other stuff as well?
Let's just say China disables Taiwan's airforce. Then what? What do you propose they do next? Seaborne invasion? Air drops? How many men can China land on the shore of Taiwan? How will they be resupplied? Reinforced? Evacuate the casualties?

Landing a few thousand men is one thing, keeping them combat capable and effective throughout the campaign is quite another.
__________________
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.
gunnut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2007, 18:28 PM   #154 (permalink)
lazybastard
Regular
 
Join Date: 04-27-07
Location: Hicksville PA
Posts: 95
And all the airlift and sealift capabilities in the world won't do the PLA any good unless they have air superiority over the straights. So what's your point?
lazybastard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2007, 22:38 PM   #155 (permalink)
Officer of Engineers
Military Professional
Moderator
Scotch taster
 
Join Date: 08-06-03
Posts: 17,064
Country:
The PLA does not believe in air superiority. They want air denial.
Officer of Engineers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2007, 23:30 PM   #156 (permalink)
gunnut
Senior Contributor
 
gunnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01-27-06
Location: DPRK, Democratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
Posts: 10,209
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by lazybastard View Post
And all the airlift and sealift capabilities in the world won't do the PLA any good unless they have air superiority over the straights. So what's your point?
What sealift capability?
gunnut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2007, 23:38 PM   #157 (permalink)
Officer of Engineers
Military Professional
Moderator
Scotch taster
 
Join Date: 08-06-03
Posts: 17,064
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by lazybastard View Post
I've been following the situation for over 10 years and I find the 980 missiles to be kinda light. I was expecting 1200 missiles by now 5 years ago. Still, my view is that these are tactical systems, not strategic. In that, I do not expect the PLA to use them on airfields. I expect them to be directed in by a FOO.

Let me explain. I've been observing for over a few years now that the PLA has pioneered the usage of ballastic missile salvos in volleys of 3-5 missiles per volley. Now depending on the target, that's a total of 200-400 sorties. That is way too few of numbers for a concentrated attack to take out the RoCAF ... unless they have real time intel of where their targets are ... meaning a FOO.
Officer of Engineers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2007, 09:39 AM   #158 (permalink)
lazybastard
Regular
 
Join Date: 04-27-07
Location: Hicksville PA
Posts: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
What sealift capability?
What sealift they have isn't enough for a successful landing yet, that doesn't mean they are not buying more as fast as the budget allow

Quote:
Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
I've been following the situation for over 10 years and I find the 980 missiles to be kinda light. I was expecting 1200 missiles by now 5 years ago. Still, my view is that these are tactical systems, not strategic. In that, I do not expect the PLA to use them on airfields. I expect them to be directed in by a FOO.

Let me explain. I've been observing for over a few years now that the PLA has pioneered the usage of ballastic missile salvos in volleys of 3-5 missiles per volley. Now depending on the target, that's a total of 200-400 sorties. That is way too few of numbers for a concentrated attack to take out the RoCAF ... unless they have real time intel of where their targets are ... meaning a FOO.
Is that really feasible? What's the flight time for one of these things to cross the straight + average response time?
lazybastard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2007, 12:51 PM   #159 (permalink)
Officer of Engineers
Military Professional
Moderator
Scotch taster
 
Join Date: 08-06-03
Posts: 17,064
Country:
30 minutes from a call from the FOO to impact.
Officer of Engineers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2007, 14:33 PM   #160 (permalink)
Archer
Senior Contributor
 
Archer's Avatar
 
Join Date: 10-13-03
Posts: 2,888
Quote:
Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
30 minutes from a call from the FOO to impact.
Special forces? Spies in Taiwan?
__________________
Karmani Vyapurutham Dhanuhu

My bow is stretched for its task
Archer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2007, 15:05 PM   #161 (permalink)
Officer of Engineers
Military Professional
Moderator
Scotch taster
 
Join Date: 08-06-03
Posts: 17,064
Country:
Have to be SF. The batteries are owned by the 2nd Artillery Force. Spies don't have the authority nor do they speak the same language.
Officer of Engineers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2007, 15:17 PM   #162 (permalink)
zraver
Contrary by nature.
Military Professional
 
Join Date: 10-22-06
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 3,379
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
Have to be SF. The batteries are owned by the 2nd Artillery Force. Spies don't have the authority nor do they speak the same language.
OoE, do the Chinese missiles (2RF)have that good of a CEP? Seems to me cruise missiles offe a beter strike capability, Taiwan won't see them coming and so can be used for airfeild denial and to hit radar appatures, phone exchanges, then the ballistics hit C4Si infomation systems and other targets in pursuit of the Chicoms goals.
zraver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2007, 16:13 PM   #163 (permalink)
Officer of Engineers
Military Professional
Moderator
Scotch taster
 
Join Date: 08-06-03
Posts: 17,064
Country:
The M9/M11 missiles are advertised to have less than 100 metres CEP. I think there is alot of internal PLA politics involved as to why they went with ballastic missiles rather than cruise missiles (though they are slowly acquiring those but nowhere near the speed of their BM batteries).

Originally, the 2nd Artillery Force (2AF) was the nuclear strike arm of the PLA. Only problem is that they don't own the nukes. The nukes belong to the Central Military Commission and are stored at a CMC location away from their delivery vehicles and under CMC guard.

I know the 2AF has been so frustrated, even during exercise, in trying to get some sort of nuclear release mechanism in place that they went the conventional explosive route but still required to maintain the nuclear option because of their original mandate.
Officer of Engineers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2007, 21:31 PM   #164 (permalink)
xrough
Senior Contributor
 
xrough's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01-08-07
Location: Manila
Posts: 916
Country:
We are talking about a thousand missile pointed on Taiwan, so it means a clear victory for China if ever they use force against Taiwan and if ever no US intervention?
__________________
xrough is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2007, 23:04 PM   #165 (permalink)
Officer of Engineers
Military Professional
Moderator
Scotch taster
 
Join Date: 08-06-03
Posts: 17,064
Country:
I can't see it. It the Taiwanese decides to put up a fight, they will win.
Officer of Engineers is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Debate about China, india and US economies, by Businessweek oneman28 Political Discussions 7 11-28-2007 08:43 AM
China’s democratization and reunification pin_qinghai International Defense Topics 100 01-06-2007 07:59 AM
PLAN Analysis rickusn Naval Forces 9 06-12-2006 15:05 PM
China's Changing Military Ideology Frank Zhou World Affairs Board Pub 0 05-03-2006 18:58 PM
World Naval Rankings rickusn Naval Forces 66 03-04-2005 01:11 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:17 AM.


Rochen is the business hosting sponsor of World Affairs Board and a provider of reseller web hosting services.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC8